I'm currently working on a CMS for meteor (basically a WordPress-like).
I have a simple question about the design of this CMS.
Should I divide my CMS in two application :
-One part for the viewed content (site, template, viewer plugins)
-Another one for the administration part (statistics, web mastering, post and page creation, etc)
Or,
Should I make an all in one application using different routes and security levels.
From my point of view both have pros and cons.
Divide :
Share the CMS between several servers.
Possibility to manage different websites with only one administration application. Looks like a network.
-Using administration without the viewer app.(Headless Drupal)
-Using the full meteor potential for big application.
All in one :
Smaller application, template more adapted to the administration panel.
Easier to handling it.
-Blog oriented.
I'm really interested by your ideas and opinion.
Thanks.
I'd suggest splitting it up between viewers and admin. You don't want viewers of the site to have to download so much extra code. Both parts can share the same database.
Related
I am using Kentico portal to make an E-commerce site.If I wish to change the design of available sample E-commerce site.Would it be a tidious task ?
Example : If I download e-commerce design templates (i.e html and css files) and I wish to change design of each page of sample kentico site (home page,product detail page etc.)then, what is the most suitable and quick way to achieve this ?
How should I update the html/css of each page of available site with downloaded templates? OR Should I create entirely a new e-commerce site in the portal ?
The out of the box sites are meant to be used as examples and references not to build a production site off of. The markup used on the Ecommerce site will also be different, considerably different than your purchased template. I've found it much easier and faster to start from scratch with a blank site and implement all of the design that way. Make sure you take advantage of shared layouts and templates, this will help make development and re-skins in the future easier.
We currently have a fully developed web forms application, basically its like WordPress using .net for multiple users to publish content. It does more than that but thats the simplest way to describe it. Our "webmasters" (I work in the gov) want everything put inside of SharePoint. We currently have SharePoint 2007. I have no experience developing within SharePoint so I don't know much about it.
My question is how do you decide when to develop your application in SharePoint and when to develop outside of it.
It depends on several things.
Is there any reason to use SharePoint features (lists for data storage, document libraries with versioning, groups for security, etc.) in your application? If you're just hosting ASP.NET pages within SharePoint but aren't using any of its features, it's not really worth the hassle.
However, if you would be adding the application to an existing SharePoint site, it might still be a good idea. Organizing everything in one place might be more convenient for users than setting up a separate web application.
If it is a requirement to re-architect your application to work with SharePoint, that is one very big reason to develop with SharePoint. Beyond that, the people influencing your architecture decisions may have good reasons of their own.
SharePoint provides security management, search and navigation to name a few relevant pieces to your web puzzle. If you are already creating dynamic web applications in .Net, a lot of what you've learned in the process will apply, but you have some learning to do.
Your orginization is not the only one moving most web applications to SharePoint. If you don't learn it now, you risk getting behind the curve.
You could also just 'show' your existing applications inside of a SharePoint web part (Page Viewer?). That way, your application remains the same, and it is 'shown' inside the SharePoint environment. This is somewhat a hokey solution, but in your particular circumstance, it could be viable considering development time, learning time, and control.
I am building a publicly facing website that does the following.
Users log in.
And then view a list of their customers.
They click on a customer to view their past purchases, order them, change them etc.
This is not a shopping site by the way.
It is a simple look up tool.
Note that none of the data accessed by the website is in anything other than a SQL database - no office documents. Also, the login does not use users Windows credentials on a VPN or something like that.
Typically I would build this using a standard ASP.NET MVC website.
However the client says they want to use Sharepoint.
As I understand it, Sharepoint is used for workflow and websites that are collaboration tools such as the components you can see here http://www.sharepointhosting.com/sharepoint-features.html
Here are my questions:
Would I be right in saying that WSS is completely inappropriate for this task as it comes with an overhead that provides no benefits?
If I had to use it, would I need WSS or MOSS?
If I had to use it, would I be right in saying the site would consist of :
List item
a) Web Parts
b) And a custom site layout. How do I create one of these?
Addendum:The book Professional SharePoint 2007 Web Content Management Development looks like a good start
1.) I agree that SharePoint would be quite inappropriate for this task. A few reasons:
It costs thousands of dollars to license SharePoint for use on the open Internet
SharePoint will use a lot of resources (SQL Server, IIS, Active Directory...) that are unnecessarily demanding for your task
SP will give you very little flexibility to develop a solution in your way -- it sounds like you would need to create a database-connected Web Part in ASP.NET anyway (so that could be entirely independent of SP)
SharePoint has it's place--it can be remarkably helpful as a company's internal document management, intranet, and workflow/approval system--but it is not well suited for custom code nor Internet use.
2.) I believe MOSS would be required for the Internet license (as in the link above).
3.) SP development is not like typical relation database systems (for example, it uses flat, unnormalized tables). If your SQL matched the SharePoint way of thinking, you might be able to connect to your database as an external List using SharePoint Designer. More likely you would need to use Visual Studio to create a custom Web Part in ASP.NET.
Hopefully this'll be a few reasonable arguments you can use to help the customer see how SharePoint is inappropriate for the task... In fact, I expect just the first point (the cost of licensing) will turn them.
You can technically use WSS for this task but MOSS has more features aimed at building public facing websites. The publishing infrastructure comes to mind. It has has the CQWP which enables you to build custom interfaces which perform well in SharePoint. With SharePoint there are potentially challenges around scalability. If you know the platform well then doing something like what you have suggested would be a pretty quick task. If you don't know SharePoint and the underlying system well you could face challenges.
You do not want to approach building the final application with SharePoint Designer. It has behavior which can cause major problems with scalability. You want to create a SharePoint Solution comprising a number of features which can be easily deployed to SharePoint. Going this route does not alleviate performance problems but you are going to be closer to the right solution. You can package up the custom user interface elements as CQWPs or write Web Parts. I personally prefer to write Web Parts.
You do the overall site design in a Master Page. Pages within a site are then inheriting from this. If you have MOSS then you can create what are called publishing pages which contain your Web Parts. These are not available in WSS which is why people recommend against it for public websites.
To decide whether SharePoint (any version) is worth it, you need to find out if they are going to use any of the core features. If everything is going to be custom and you are not going to make use of any workflow or document management features in your deployment then I would stay away. To see whether you want to go further with SharePoint from a development perspective, take a look at the WSS developer labs. I recently ran an intro course at my employer using the materials from that site. They are dated, and need more info on best practices but they provide a quick way for you to dip a toe in the water and decide whether you want to go any further.
1) For the core functionality as you describe it SharePoint isn't going to add anything, BUT if you build it on SharePoints premisses it allows your client to add a lot of functionality outside the core for "free" like:
They can add Content Editor WebParts to pages where they can add descriptions, and messages
They can add lists where the customers can enter requests/comments/... and automatically have new entries mailed to anyone in the organisation subscribing to changes
The functionality you develop can be reused on their intranet
Any future small "web apps" can be included in the same site
...
So all in all unless you have a better framework to use then use SharePoint
2) WSS is all you need for now
3) Your main deliverable for now would be:
a feature with some Site Pages and a few Web Parts
a feature with a custom masterpage and corresponding css
True. Well not inappropriate but it doesn't add anything either.. but maybe in the future?
WSS is enough
You'd need web parts to expose your data, yes. The custom site layout is not necessary. If you want your own look and feel a SharePoint Theme may suffice. Even if you want some real custom layout tweaks you probably don't need a site template but you can get away with using just SharePoint Designer to edit the pages or master page.
We have had SharePoint where I work for a little while now, but we've not done a lot with it. We have an intranet with hundreds of ASP/ASP.Net applications and I'm wondering what kind of things can be done to integrate with SharePoint to make a more seamless environment? We put documentation and production move requests and so on in SharePoint now, but it pretty much feels like it's own separate system rather than an integrated tool on our intranet.
I've searched around to see what other people are doing with SharePoint but I've been finding a lot of useless information.
A great idea for you would be move your most used asp.net apps to run within the SharePoint site. Each app can be added either as a control directly on a pagelayout or integrated into a webpart (use the webpart to load child controls).
This would allow you to use the flexible moss interface to move the asp.net app into a unified information architecture so people can find the app easily.
SharePoint is really easy to roll out something that works, but creating a seamless intranet does require a bit of thinking outside of SharePoint itself (i.e. what should go where, which users need to see what, navigation structure...)
That is really a lot of work and requires lots of input from people outside the IT area.
A typical intranet portal segments functionality by department. Each department will probably have some custom web-based apps that you might have historically implemented in ASP.Net, and linked to from the intranet portal. With sharepoint you can start bringing the useful bits of those custom web-apps in as modular parts, so that the business owner of the portal can have more control as to how information is structured and displayed to his/her users.
Think dashboards, populated with custom metrics that only make sense to individual departments. That's one of the most obvious places to start. HR, accounting, IT, they all have metrics they want to track and display. They all have legacy systems that they might want to correlate information from. All this can be done in reusable web-parts. Since Sharepoint gives the end-user the control over layout, display, audience control, etc, you don't end up reinventing wheels all day.
SharePoint was designed to be a collaboration portal and document repository. If you have other business processes wrapped up in other internal web sites, you may not get much benefit from converting these sites into SharePoint sub-sites.
However, if there is signifcant overlap in your applications (contact lists, inventory, specs, etc.) you may want to make the investment to combine.
If you have InfoPath, you can create online forms. You can share your docs and edit them online. You can start an approvement workflow on these docs. You can create polls. You can create work groups.
Basically SharePoint is a giant and robust document store, but you can do anything what you can do in any ASP.NET web application. You can create e.g. custom workflows to automate business processes. We've worked for several customers to create corporate intranets and sometimes internet sites, so it really works. :)
But sometimes it's very hard to implement the requested features (a lot of workarounds).
Really its an intranet in a box. We pretty much run all of our day to day development tasks off of it. We keep documentation, track defects, manage people's time off etc. You can migrate your asp.net and asp applications to run under the sharepoint site. In the adminstration section you can set up web applications to run under the same site, but outside of sharepoint's control. That would probably help with the "feel" of it being completely seperate.
Sharepoint is really a shift in the way people have to think about web development and that's the key. You're no longer developing a standalone application, you're adding on to an existing framework. I would put it akin to having "silos of data" vs. a centralized database system which houses all the company's data. Once people realize that everything is connected, it will feel more like a seemless integration. My advice is to actively try and create applications in sharepoint and think about how to migrate existing apps on to it.
How about BI and reporting from an ERP?
When we know IE is uncapable to handle a page with 10000 table rows (without pagination)
Many don't realize but the success of a reporting tool depends on the performance of the grid object used - Excel and the SpreadSheet obj from the defunct Office Web Components are still the #1 in user's (accountants, managers, ceo) choice.
I think it depends on your environment. In our environment, we setup each department with their own pages and we use it for basic information, surveys, and the employee's homepage. We've built Google/Live Search and Weather.com widgets and roll RSS feeds using Tim Huer's RSS control.
One thing you can do is to create web parts to provide access to data from existing applications. Initially they could simply be read-only views, but depending on your experience they could be fleshed out to allow writes.
Another idea is to add links between SharePoint and your applications (assuming they're web based); that will at least allow a flow between them.
I haven't done it, but you could also theoretically skin SharePoint to look like the rest of your intranet.
Create libraries
Form libraries, documents libraries, slide libraries
Create standard or custom lists
Standard lists - announcements, tasks, contacts
Custom lists - suppliers, contractors, inventories, orders
Setup secure team discussion areas
Build shared team calendars
Create simple workflow processes on documents and lists
I'm currently planning the migration of a Microsoft Content Management Server (MCMS) website to a SharePoint 2007 publishing site.
The top-level site is a public facing, anonymously-accessible website. It will contain two areas which need to be protected with forms-based authentication - each of which will have a distinct set of users.
There is content in the current MCMS site which uses "Connected Postings", which is the ability to use content in multiple places without duplicating it. In SharePoint, a similar concept is supported via the Reusable Content list, but this doesn't span site collections.
I'm thinking that this should be a single web application with three site collections. 1 for the public facing site, and the others for the two protected areas. However, I'm not sure if 1 site collection can be anonymous, with the other 2 implementing different FBA authentication providers.
I'd like my Urls to be something like:
www.whatever.com
www.whatever.com/protectedarea1
www.whatever.com/protectedarea2
Without Url rewriting, this would be difficult to do with separate web applications.
If I end up having to go with 3 separate web applications in order to get authentication to work as desired, I will probably have to get creative with content deployment so as not to duplicate content during authoring.
Would appreciate any thoughts, thank you!
Don't do MCMS so cannot answer specific to that, see http://www.andrewconnell.com/blog/ for alot of info.
Microsoft has a bunch of different designs for extranets, http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc263513.aspx depending on your needs. You can set it up as you are describing, forms are a little weak put their is some a better version available on CodePlex.
For the URLS, Sharepoint has a feature called "Manged Paths" that will do what you want. No URL rewriting needed.
Our setup is a site collection for extranet and internal, where most work is done. When finished they can publish it(does make an extra copy) to the public site. Some public sites are publish only sites where they have no interaction with non-account people, some are sites were they actually do most of their work and non-account people can make contributions. All are available under MOSS.
Thanks, that extranet link will be helpful when looking at separating the authoring environment from the publishing environment.
I was trying to implement two FBA membership providers on two site collections within the same web application. Doesn't look like I can do that, gonna try using the same membership provider with different roles.